Learning Selective Communication for Multi-Agent Path Finding
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Learning communication via deep reinforcement learning (RL) or imitation learning (IL) has recently been shown to be an effective way to solve Multi-Agent Path Finding (MAPF). However, existing communication based MAPF solvers focus on broadcast communication, where an agent broadcasts its message to all other or predefined agents. It is not only impractical but also leads to redundant information that could even impair the multi-agent cooperation. A succinct communication scheme should learn <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">which</i> information is relevant and influential to each agent’s decision making process. To address this problem, we consider a request-reply scenario and propose <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Decision Causal Communication</i> (DCC), a simple yet efficient model to enable agents to select neighbors to conduct communication during both training and execution. Specifically, a neighbor is determined as relevant and influential only when the presence of this neighbor causes the decision adjustment on the central agent. This judgment is learned only based on agent’s local observation and thus suitable for decentralized execution to handle large scale problems. Empirical evaluation in obstacle-rich environment indicates the high success rate with low communication overhead of our method.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it